Merged CAL/UAL seniority lists
05-12-2010, 05:20 AM
#141
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2006
Position: 737 CA
Posts: 2,750
Originally Posted by Fritzthepilot
Didn't ALPA merger policy change after the DAL/NWA integration?
the old policy: (both UsAir and DAL were merged under the old policy)
a. Preserve jobs.
b. Avoid windfalls to either group at the expense of the other.
c. Maintain or improve pre-merger pay and standard of living.
d. Maintain or improve pre-merger pilot status.
e. Minimize detrimental changes to career expectations.
the new policy: (in no particular order)
a. Career Expectaions
b. Status and Category
c. Longevity
05-12-2010, 05:27 AM
#142
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2006
Position: 737 CA
Posts: 2,750
Originally Posted by Monkeyfly
I agree that this concept is likley to be in the final decision...
Isn't there more of a disparity in narrow v. widebody for us?
Resulting in an advantage for UAL in the widebody integration
and CAL in the narrowbody? Maybe the arbitrator will think that evens
things out.
Also, did NWA/DAL have such a large furlough disparity?
Isn't there more of a disparity in narrow v. widebody for us?
Resulting in an advantage for UAL in the widebody integration
and CAL in the narrowbody? Maybe the arbitrator will think that evens
things out.
Also, did NWA/DAL have such a large furlough disparity?
05-12-2010, 08:47 AM
#143
Banned
Joined APC: Dec 2007
Position: EMB 145 CPT
Posts: 2,934
Originally Posted by jsled
8. The Northwest pilots pulled in paragraph 2. were inserted directly above the next junior Northwest pilot.
And what was the rational for number 2?
05-12-2010, 11:40 AM
#144
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2006
Position: 737 CA
Posts: 2,750
They called it a "pull and plug". The NWA pilots were an older group due to the number of early retirements at DAL. To remedy this, they pulled 274 "old dudes" from the NWA list and did the ssl without them. Then went back and plugged them into the list right above the next junior NWA guy on their original list.
Last edited by jsled; 05-12-2010 at 04:15 PM.
05-13-2010, 08:31 PM
#145
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2007
Position: Fero's
Posts: 472
05-14-2010, 04:18 AM
#146
Keep Calm Chive ON
Joined APC: Feb 2008
Position: Boeing's Plastic Jet Button Pusher - 787
Posts: 2,086
Originally Posted by chuckyt1
Didn't quite get the 'junior' active pilot on property correct, something about the inverse
05-14-2010, 05:04 AM
#147
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jun 2008
Position: 737 CAPT
Posts: 1,882
Not only the most junior pilot thing being wrong, but the comment of "Continental has higher pay but more restrictive work rules" makes no sense. We don't HAVE work rules. It's the FARs for the most part. I think they didn't quite know how to make the statement.
05-21-2010, 03:53 AM
#149
Not retiring avatar
Joined APC: Apr 2010
Position: 777 CAP
Posts: 768
Hypothetical Question
Before I ask the question, I would like to say that getting all worked up at each other about seniority is somewhere between whistling dixie and spitting into the wind.
But I would like to hear what you have to say...
(If you can answer in the spirit of unity, without ultimatums or rants)
But I would like to hear what you have to say...
(If you can answer in the spirit of unity, without ultimatums or rants)
- Assuming that the CAL merger committee and their lawyer argue for UAL furloughs to be placed behind active pilots, and the UAL merger side argues for some sort of longevity recognition for furloughed/junior pilots; and the mediator/arbitrator comes back to CAL and says, "You need to come off your position and come up with something that gives these pilots some credit for longevity."
05-21-2010, 05:54 AM
#150
Line Holder
Joined APC: May 2010
Posts: 32
Originally Posted by Monkeyfly
Before I ask the question, I would like to say that getting all worked up at each other about seniority is somewhere between whistling dixie and spitting into the wind.
But I would like to hear what you have to say...
(If you can answer in the spirit of unity, without ultimatums or rants)
But I would like to hear what you have to say...
(If you can answer in the spirit of unity, without ultimatums or rants)
- Assuming that the CAL merger committee and their lawyer argue for UAL furloughs to be placed behind active pilots, and the UAL merger side argues for some sort of longevity recognition for furloughed/junior pilots; and the mediator/arbitrator comes back to CAL and says, "You need to come off your position and come up with something that gives these pilots some credit for longevity."
I feel that "what if-" discussions of this nature can be counterproductive and possibly incendiary. We are two great airlines. When combined, we will be a unified, formidable team.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
